










































































































































































S P E E CII 


JK 1071 
.B18 
Copy 1 


OF 


ARTHIR P. BARBV, OF ALABAMA 


ON 


THE MOTION OF MR. WRIGHT, 


TO AMEND THE SECOND SECTION OF THE BILL 


FOR THE APPORTIONMENT OF THE REPRESENTATIVES 


AMONG THE SEVERAL STATES, 


ACCORDING TO THE SIXTH CENSUS. 



DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
ON FRIDAY, JUNE 3, 


TER. 




WASHINGTON t 
P, FORCE, PRIN 
Hk 1842 , 










SPEECH 


On the motion of Mr. Wright, to amend the second section of the Apportionment Bill, in 

the Senate, on Friday, the 3d of June, 1842, Mr. Bagby, being entitled to the floor, ad¬ 
dressed the Senate as follows : 

Mr. President : I am certainly under obligations to the honorable sena¬ 
tor from Virginia who was pleased, at a late hour on yesterday, to move an 
adjournment, in order that 1 might have the opportunity of entering upon the 
discussion of this question at a time when I should feel less oppressed by the 
fatigue of a long session, and when the Senate would be better prepared, and 
more disposed to give an attentive hearing to the remarks I shall have the 
honor of submitting in relation to it. Candor impels me to the declaration, 
however, that I am still laboring under too much bodily infirmity, to hope or 
expect to be able to do justice to the various and important considerations, 
of deep and solemn import, which belong to this great and interesting sub¬ 
ject. Accustomed, as 1 have been, to meet in some way every emergency to 
w^hich I have been subjected, and unwilling as I am, at this advanced period 
of the session, to be the means of delaying the final action of the Senate on 
this bill, especially wh^n I consider the attitude in which some of the States 
stand in regard to its provisions, being about to assemble their legislatures for 
the purpose of providing for the election of members to the next Congress, I 
propose to submit to you, as succinctly as I can, the views I entertain in rela¬ 
tion to this measure, both in its principles and its details. In the remarks I 
intend to submit to the Senate, 1 shall not confine myself to the amendment 
submitted by the senator from New-York, (Mr. Wright,) to whose luminous 
views I listened with great pleasure and respect, but shall endeavor to show 
that the second section of the bill, as it now stands, is entirely unconstitutional, 
that the amendment of the senator will not remove that unconstitutionality, 
and that there is, in fact, nothing in the second section to amend by. 

In attempting to illustrate, fully, the views I entertain in regard to this sub¬ 
ject, it will be necessary to recur, for a moment, to that period in our history, 
so full of danger and glory, which immediately preceded the formation of the 
constitution. It is a hallowed scene, Mr. President, and will form a pleasant 
excursion. It is good for us to be there. I pass over those triumphant scenes 
which marked the progress of the Revolution, from Bunker’s Hill, where the 
remains of Warren, the first martyr in the cause of liberty, lie wrapt in honor¬ 
ed repose, to the ever memorable plains of Little York. I commence at that 
deeply interesting period in our history when the din of war and the clangor 
of arms had ceased, and when those pure and spotless patriots, who, by the 
valor of their arms and the wisdom of their counsels, with that great and vene¬ 
rable man, to whom, with one accord, we apply the endearing appellation of 


's: 



4 


tiie lather of his country, anti who, in the language of a celebrated British 
statesman, furnished more than any other human being the idea of a perfect 
man, at their head, had met for the purpose of casting the mould of a new 
Government, and placing those rights for which they had fought and bled, 
and in defence of which thousands had found glorious graves, on a firm, and, 
as they no doubt fondly hoped, an imperishable basis. What, permit me to 
inquire, was the great leading cause which led to the Revolution ? It was the 
denial of the right of representation—that right, which was declared in 
never dying terms, on the face of that immortal instrument which denounced 
our separation from Great Britain, to be inestimable to freemen, and formi¬ 
dable to tyrants only. 

IMr. President, whatever doubt may exist in regard to the opinions of other 
senators upon this subject, I have an especial desire to have it distinctly un¬ 
derstood, that it is my well settled, long established, firm, and unchangeable 
opinion, that the general ticket system is the only constitutional mode of 
electing members of the House of Representatives; and that the only power 
which Congress or the State legislatures possess over the subject is, to fix 
“ the time, place, and manner of holding the elections.” 1 speak in the 
language of the constitution. In the formation of that sacred instrument, its 
wise and illustrious framers found it necessary to create and establish three 
depositories of power. This Government constitutes one of these deposito¬ 
ries; and it possesses just as much power, and no more, as the States thought 
proper to confer upon it, in order “ to form a more perfect union, establish 
justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote 
the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.” 

The second depository of power is the State Governments, which consists 
of such powers as the States, through their representatives in the conven¬ 
tion, respectively, reserved to themselves, in their separate, independent, so¬ 
vereign capacities. 

The third depository of power under the constitution, is the people of the 
several States. 

Here, then, we have the General Government possessed, and entitled to 
the full exercise of the powers delegated to it; the States in possession of the 
powers reserved to them; and the people in possession of the rights reserved 
to them. It is not necessary, for the purposes of this discussion, to go into 
an examination of the rights and duties of the Federal and State Govern¬ 
ments, although that is a subject full of instruction, and full of interest, and, 
perhaps, better calculated than any other, to test the wisdom of our form of 
Government, and the probable perpetuity of our institutions. I waive that, 
however, and proceed to inquire into the powers reserved to the people. 

The very first substantive provision in the constitution is the following: 
“ Members of the House of Representatives shall be chosen every second 
year, by the people of the several States, and the electors in each State 
shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous 
branch of the State legislature.” This is the first enactment, it is the frontis¬ 
piece of the federal constitution, and it is by the true construction of this 
provision of the constitution, that I shall endeavor to show that any mode or 
form of election, by which the people of a State, having the requisite quali¬ 
fications to vote for members of the most numerous branch of the State legis¬ 
lature, are deprived of the right to vote for the whole number of i«presen- 


tatives to vvliich such State is entitled, is violative ol the fodcial constitution, 
and utterly subversive ol the rights reserved to the people of the several 
States. This is an entire reservation, indivisible in itself, in favor of the 
vvliole people. Compare this reservation in favor of the people of the se¬ 
veral States, to choose members of the House of Representatives, with the 
reservation in favor of the State legislatures to elect senators. The reserva¬ 
tion is just as complete in the one case as in the other. It is an entirety in 
both, and you can with no more propriety deprive the qualified voters of the 
right to vote for the whole number of representatives to which the Slate is 
entitled, than you can deprive the members of the legislature of a State of 
the right to vote for two senators. The reservation is to the yeoyle in the 
one case, and to the legislatures in the other. If you can so divide the peo¬ 
ple as to restrain them to vote for a single member, why may you not say 
that the two branches of a State legislature, being co-ordinate and co-equal, 
the Senate should elect one senator, and the House of Representatives the 
other; or, that in order to carry out this fascinating idea of electing members 
of Congress by geographical limits and subdivisions, each State should be 
divided by a line running north and south, or east and west, and that the 
members coming from one side of that line should elect one senator, and 
those coming from the other side, should elect the other senator. You 
have precisely the same power, except as to the place, over the election of 
senators, that you have over the election of Members of the House of Re¬ 
presentatives; and 1 shall attempt to prove, before I conclude, that it would, 
at the present time, be much more proper to exercise it in relation to the 
election of senators, than to assert the startling proposition contained in the 
second section of this bill. Bear in mind, sir, that the reservation of power 
is to the State legislatures in the one case, and to the people of the several 
States in the other, if you cannot abridge the power of the State legisla¬ 
tures in the election of senators, will you dare, with unhallowed hands, to 
enter the temple of representative freedom, and rifle the people of their right 
to vote, just in proportion to the number of districts you create ? Neither 
Congress nor the State legislatures have any power over the rights of the 
voter. He derives them from a higher tenure; he holds them under the 
charter of his liberties, and any attempt to restrain, or restrict him in the ex¬ 
ercise of that right, is a violation of that charter. When any attempt is made 
to abridge the rights of the States, there are some yet left who rise in their 
defence, and boldly assert their rights; but the rights of the people are lost 
sight of. 

I assert, upon the authority of the federal constitution, that each voter, in 
each of the States of this Union, having the requisite qualifications to vote 
for members of the most numerous branch of the State legislature, has a 
right to vote for the whole number of representatives to which such State, 
according to numbers, is entitled. Here is the constitutional provision : 
“The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every 
second year, by the people of the several States, and the electors in each 
State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous 
branch of the State legislatures.”—2 ISect., 1 Art., Co7i. U. S. Here is 
the grant or reservation, and here is the only limitation upon it. Both are 
entirely beyond the reach of Congress or the State legislatures. They are 
fixed in the constitution. It was a great fundamental right, intended by the 


6 


framers of the constitution to be placed beyond the reach of change, acci¬ 
dent, or caprice. 

If, then, I am correct in supposing that the people of the several States, 
in their capacity and character as separate, independent, political communi¬ 
ties, constitute one of the great depositories of power, to which was intended 
to be confided through all time, the right of supplying a part of the agents 
and machinery by which this Government was to be kept in motion, and the 
rights of the people themselves preserved in perpetuity, it becomes necessary 
to inquire, what is meant by the people of a State. I will not insult the un¬ 
derstanding of the Senate, by telling them, that when we speak of the people 
of a State, or nation, we mean the whole people. When you speak of the 
people of Great Britain, do you mean the people of London, or Manchester, 
or Liverpool? When you speak of the people of France, do you mean the 
people of Paris, Bordeaux, Marseilles ? When you speak of the people 
of the United States, do you mean the people of Boston, New York, Phila¬ 
delphia, New Orleans ? Sir, the common sense of mankind answers you, 
No. You mean the whole people. Suppose the constitution were so 
amended as to give to the people of this District the right to elect two mem¬ 
bers of the House of Representatives, and requiring that the voters should 
possess the same qualifications that would entitle them to vote for members 
of the most numerous branch of the State legislature in Maryland or Virginia. 
Is there a man in this body, or in this nation, who doubts, for a moment, that 
each voter possessing these qualifications would have a right to vote for two 
members ? This is precisely analagous to the reservation in favor of the 
people of the States, and I defy human ingenuity to point out a difference 
between them. 

Take another illustration. In almost all the States of this Union there is 
a constitutional provision precisely similar, in regard to representation, to the 
one contained in the federal constitution, by which it is provided that repre¬ 
sentation shall, at stated periods, be apportioned among the several counties 
according to their respective numbers. And yet it has never occurred to 
any of the advocates of the district system, that each qualified voter in the 
county was not entitled to vote for the whole number of representatives to which 
such county was entitled—although it is the practice in many of the States 
to divide the counties into districts or precincts for the purpose of holding 
the elections. 

I beg leave now to call the attention of the Senate to that provision of the 
constitution under which this gigantic assumption of power is attempted to 
be sustained. And v/here do you find it? Bear in mind, sir, you are set¬ 
tling the great and vital question, what powers belong to the people of the 
several States of this Union in the election of members of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives. It is a tremendous question, and upon its correct determination 
depends, in my judgment, the safety and happiness of the people, and the 
perpetuity of our cherished institutions. For, if a rule can be adopted and 
enforced in this case, by which the rights of the people can be filched from 
them, just in proportion to the number of members they are entitled to elect, 
It may be done in any other, and the time will soon come when all the 
powers reserved to the people, will have to yield to some arbitrary rule of 
construction, and the melancholy remnant of powers left to them will not be 
ivorih preserving. Recollect the second section of the first article of the 


7 


constitution reserves to the people of the several States the right to choose 
members of the House of Representatives. What power have you, or the 
State legislatures, over this subject ? I pause for a reply. I call upon the ad¬ 
vocates of the second section of this bill to point me to the provision in the 
constitution which gives to Congress or the State legislatures any power or 
control over the right of the people to choose members of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives. You have no such power. That right is fixed by the consti¬ 
tution. And while that instrument stands, the right remains as fixed as the 
rock of ages. 

Having shown that neither Congress nor the State legislatures have any 
power over the right of the electors in the election of members of the 
House of Representatives—having shown that neither the rights nor the 
qualifications of the voter can be enlarged or diminished; I proceed now 
to inquire what power you have over this subject. The constitution itself 
furnishes the answer. The fourth section of the first article of the consti¬ 
tution is in these words: “The times, places, and manner of holding the elec¬ 
tions for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the 
legislature thereof, but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter 
such regulations, except as to the place of choosing senators.’’ This is the 
only provision of the constitution which gives to Congress any power what¬ 
ever over this subject. What is the extent of this power? To prescribe the 
qualifications of the voter? No, sir! But simply to determine the time, place, 
and manner of holding the elections. The right to vote, and the qualifica¬ 
tion of the voter, are fixed by the constitution, and are equally beyond the 
jurisdiction of Congress and the State legislatures. Let us analyze this fourth 
section, and see what is meant by prescribing the time, place, and manner of 
holding the elections. And here permit me to remark, that according to the 
concurrent opinion of all commentators on the constitution, the debates in 
the Federal convention, and in all the State conventions, this power was never 
to be touched by Congress, unless the States failed or refused to exercise it, 
or exercised it in such manner as to be subversive of the object intended to 
be accomplished by it; and that any attempt on the part of Congress to 
exercise it under existing circumstances is a sheer usurpation, and direct en¬ 
croachment on the obvious spirit and meaning of the constitution. 

But I pass that by, and proceed to inquire what power the fourth section 
confers. First, then, as to the time. Under this grant in the section, it is 
competent for Congress to say that the elections shall he held on the first 
Monday in July. Second, as to the places. Under this branch of the section, 
it is competent for Congress to say that the elections shall be held at the 
court houses of the respective counties throughout the States, or at any other 
place they may designate. Third, as to the manner. Under this part of the 
clause, it is competent for Congress to determine whether the election shall be 
held by one officer or by a dozen officers; who shall receive the votes; who 
determine their legality; and in what manner they shall be recorded, counted, and 
returned. If the fourth section of the first article means any thing more than 
this, there is no certainty in language. And I defy the boldest advocate of 
latitudinarian construction to attach any other meaning to it. 

Having, then, shown the rights of the people are secured by the constitu¬ 
tion, and that neither Congress nor the State legislatures have, in relation to 
this subject, any power over them; having shown what is meant by the times, 


8 


places, and manner of holding the elections, 1 shall now attempt to answer 
some of the objections urged against the election by general ticket. 

Before I proceed to the consideration of the objections, founded in princi¬ 
ple, to the general ticket system, I feel called on to notice one of the prac¬ 
tical objections urged against it by the distinguished senator from Kentucky, 
(Mr. Crittenden.) That senator said the general ticket system was liable 
to great abuse, by being prostituted to party purposes, and cited Alabama 
as an instance. It is not my province to determine what motives may govern 
in other States, or what may be the standard of political morality in Ken¬ 
tucky ; but I beg leave to assure that gentleman, that if he were acquainted 
vvith the people of Alabama, he would do them the justice to believe, that, 
in the determination and settlement of a great constitutional question, vitally 
interesting to civil liberty itself, they were influenced and operated upon by 
higher motives than an unprincipled thirst for political power. (Mr. Critten- 
DEN explained.) I was satisfied, from the elevation of the gentleman’s char¬ 
acter, and what I have understood to be the loftiness and magnanimity of his 
nature, that the remarks which had escaped him in the ardor of debate had no 
foundation in his deliberate opinions, and am satisfied with the explanation. I 
still think the gentleman unfortunate, in having derived all his information 
from one side, and that side, in my judgment, wilfully wrong, or honestly 
mistaken. 

I had more agency, from my position at the time, than any one individual 
in Alabama, in bringing about the change in the election of members of 
Congress, from the district to the general ticket system. Long and anxious 
reflection, aided by more patient investigation than I am in the habit of be¬ 
stowing upon political subjects, satisfied me beyond the possibility of change, 
that, in recommending the general ticket system, I was carrying out that great 
principle of popular liberty which lies at the bottom of our institutions. 
In the course I have pursued in relation to this question elsewhere, and in 
the course I pursue in regard to it here, I am wholly uninfluenced by any 
pride of opinion, or any hope of personal benefit to myself. I am no political 
propagandist, abounding in new theories. I have already realized the con¬ 
viction on my own mind, that the little part I have been destined to act in 
relation to this question, as well as the great drama of public life generally, 
is to be borne away in the progress of events without leaving a trace behind 
it. But, I am interested in preserving to myself, in the proud character of an 
American citizen, and I covet no higher distinction, the full enjoyment of the 
rights secured to me by the constitution of a common country. I have an 
abiding confidence in the virtue and intelligence of the American people. 
That confidence induces me to look forward with hope and the fullest ex¬ 
pectation to the period, and that period not very distant, when the people of 
every State in this Union will rise in the majesty of their strength, and assert 
the right secured to them by the testament of their ancestors, under which 
they hold their liberties, to elect their representatives by general ticket. In 
the assertion of that right they will not be governed by the sordid considera¬ 
tions which operate upon jiarty spirit, but by a holy desire to preserve to 
themselves, and transmit to their children through countless coming ages, the 
rich inheritance of iiopular freedom, regulated by law, and founded in order. 
01 the consolations derived from these reflections, neither principalities nor 
powers shall deprive me. 


0 


One of the arguments against the general ticket system in the election of 
members of Congress, is, that it disfranchises a portion of the people. 1 was 
aware that this argument found some inconsiderate advocates out of doors, 
but I did not expect it would find one in the Senate of the United States. 
To disfranchise, means to deprive of the rights of a free citizen. While the 
right to vote according to the dictates of conscience and judgment remains 
unfettered and uncontrolled, no man is disfranchised. It is said, however, that 
it is destructive of the rights of minorities. Beyond the ballot-box minorities 
have no rights. I have been nurtured in the school and rocked in the cradle 
of minorities. They have no right to be represented either in a popular or 
political point of view, as is clearly demonstrated by the result of every election 
from a constable up to the chief magistrate of the Union. 

It is a pleasing theory to indulge the idea of representing all men, and if 
human nature, and the nature of human institutions did not forbid it, I should 
rejoice to see it accomplished. But if gentlemen indulge the hope of adopt¬ 
ing any system by which the political principles of all parties can be repre¬ 
sented, 

“ That hope will be frail as a dream 
That cheats the long moments of night. 

But melts in the glare of the beam 
That breaks from the portals of light.” 

It is a mere illusion. The only rational hope of minorities is founded in the 
ever varying tide of public sentiment. The opinions, like the fashions of the 
world, pass away. Hence, in the lapse of time, and the fluctuations of opi¬ 
nion, the minority of to-day becomes the majority to-morrow. Any system of 
Government which gave equal representation to majorities and minorities 
would destroy itself. Indeed, it seems to me that the exclusive representa¬ 
tion of majorities is the only principle at all reconcileable with the idea of 
free Government. The great truth, not yet fully tested by experience, that 
man is capable of self-government, proceeds upon the idea that he is pos¬ 
sessed of suflicient intelligence and virtue to effectuate that great end. Ac¬ 
cording to that idea, the larger portion of that intelligence and that vir¬ 
tue is presumed to be in the greater number. This is the doctrine incul¬ 
cated by Locke, and all the writers on popular Government. This was the 
doctrine advanced by Russell, and Sidney, and Hampden. This is the doc¬ 
trine that prevailed in the better days of this Republic, and it is upon the 
maintenance of this doctrine that all which is beautiful in the theory, or valu¬ 
able in the practice, of this Government, must ultimately depend. Minori¬ 
ties have no political right in a free Government beyond the right to vote. 
The daily proceedings of this body is a living monument of the truth of that 
position. 

Another argument used with great force against the general ticket system 
is, that it gives undue weight and influence to the large and populous States, 
in the popular branch of the national legislature; or, to use the graphic lan¬ 
guage of gentlemen, it will enable the large Slates to swallow up the small 
ones. This argument is founded on an entire misconception of the nature 
and structure of this Government. Numbers is the basis of representation 
in the other House, and was intended to be so by the framers of the consti¬ 
tution. According to the second section of the first article of the constitu¬ 
tion, it is expressly provided that represeiUalives and direct taxes shall be 


10 


apportioned among the several States which may be included within this 
Union, according to their respective numbersJ^ Here we have a direct and 
express assertion of the great principle of popular representation, standing 
out in bold relief in the first article of the constitution, according to num¬ 
bers. No man who reads and understands this clause can believe that it was 
the intention of the framers of the constitution that New-York, with her two 
or three millions, should stand on the same footing in regard to representation 
in the other House, with Delaware, with her seventy thousand. Nor do I, 
for one, indulge this feeling of unworthy jealousy towards the large States. I 
remember that New-York, with her vast numbers, her immense wealth, her 
boundless enterprise, her extensive commerce, and resistless energy, is part 
and parcel of a common country, and I rejoice in the recollection ; and freely 
accord to her the advantages to which all these things entitle her. The idea 
of equal representation in the House of Representatives, of all the States, 
without regard to numbers, is contrary to the whole theory of the constitu¬ 
tion—it is un-American. 

But there is a branch of this Government where that principle of equality 
for which gentlemen under the influence of misguided counsels, or miscon¬ 
ception of the true character of this Government, contend with so much per¬ 
tinacity, is preserved in all its force and all its purity. That branch is this 
body. It is the Senate of the United States. Here, in humble imitation of 
that August Tribunal before which we shall all appear, the great and the small 
stand upon the same footing. Here, Delaware (1 mention her only for the 
sake of illustration,) with the proud mantle of State sovereignty thrown around 
her, stands upon the same elevated ground with the empire State. This body 
is the great citadel of the rights of the States. And if I might be permitted 
to appropriate the idea to this subject, I would say, around this citadel the 
tempest of popular fury, and the force of numbers beats in vain; it stands 
like the rock, which far from land uprears its majestic head, and remains un¬ 
moved by the storms that agitate the ocean. 

Gentlemen have spoken of the influence of the larger States in the House 
of Representatives, as if the national legislature consisted of only one branch. 
Having, as I think, clearly shown that the undue influence of that body would 
find a certain corrective in the Senate, in all matters of legislation, I propose 
now to inquire into the effect of the general ticket system in the election of 
members of the House of Representatives, in the event of the election of 
President of the United States devolving upon that body. In that event the 
vote is by States. The President and Vice President of the United States are 
the only officers elected directly by the whole people. In the event of the 
electoral college failing to make choice of a President, the election devolves upon 
the House of Representatives. Under the general ticket system the members 
of that body would be sure to represent the will and wishes of a majority of the 
people. In that state of things, suppose the election to go to the House. Sup¬ 
pose some bold and reckless aspirant to the office, panting for glory, and longing 
for the honors and distinctions which the first office in the world confers, should 
be so far forgetful of the obligations of duty, patriotism, and self-respect, as to 
be willing to resort to corrupt means for the purpose of gratifying the eager 
and restless promptings of ambition ; how could he expect to seduce all the 
representatives of a whole people from their allegiance ? In all his unholy 
attempts he would be met by the embodied phalanx, consisting of the entire 


11 


representatives of each State, standing in solid column upon the ramparts of 
the constitution, ready to carry out the wishes of their constituents. Whereas, 
under the district system, the vote of the largest State in the Union might 
depend upon the vote of a single individual. Our past history is full of in¬ 
struction upon this subject. At this very moment New Jersey, electing 
under the general ticket system, wields a greater political power in the House 
of Representatives than New York. This shows the force of concentration. 
And yet, with these facts staring us in the face, gentlemen contend that the 
general ticket system is destructive of the interest of the small States. 

Having shown that the district system is unconstitutional in its effects upon 
the rights of the people—that no benefit results from it in the election of 
members of the House of Representatives for mere legislative purposes—that 
in the election of President of the United States, it is fraught with infinitely 
more danger to the rights of the people, and the integrity and purity of the 
Government, than the general ticket system—having shown that Congress 
has precisely the same power in regard to the time and manner of electing 
senators that it has over the election of members of the other House, I pro¬ 
pose, now, to redeem the pledge which I made in the early part of this dis¬ 
cussion, and to show, that it is more incumbent on us to exercise the power 
in question, in regard to this body, than in relation to the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. This power over the election of senators and representatives is 
a conservative power, only intended to be exercised in case of failure or im¬ 
provident action on the part of the State legislatures. This is the language 
of Hamilton, Madison, all the commentators, and all the debaters in all the 
conventions, Stale and Federal. If the party now in power are only disposed 
to exercise this power in the cases, and for the purposes contemplated by 
the constitution, how does it happen, that they have remained silent for 
upwards of two years, and seen the patriotic State of Tennessee, the home 
of that illustrious patriot and statesman, who, while he is permitted to linger 
above the horizon of time, reflects the rays of his descending glory on that 
country to which he has rendered such incalculable services, and attracts a 
larger portion of the admiration and respect of other nations, than any human 
being now on the stage of existence—how, I ask, does it happen, that you 
have set silently by, with folded arms, and not attempted to supply this gaping 
breach in the constitution ? How can senators reconcile it to themselves to 
see this body shorn, year after year, of a part of its strength, without making 
any attempt to remedy it, when that is the very case to which the power now 
claimed was intended to apply ? There is, a reason, sir, for all this paternal 
care for the House of Representatives, but I shall not assign it now. I reserve 
that for another occasion. 

Anothjer argument in favor of the second section of this bill, is, the contem¬ 
poraneous exposition of the constitution. It is true, sir, that Mr. Madison 
does indicate an opinion in favor of districting the large States. That, added to 
the practice of a majority of the States, is the only exposition you have about it. 
But admit that I am mistaken in supposing that the district system is uncon¬ 
stitutional in trampling the rights of the people under foot, 1 insist that the 
second section of this bill is grossly unconstitutional in its detail. Admit you 
have the power to district the States, which I solemnly deny, how do you 
propose to exercise it ? The most valuable, I might say, the life preserving 
feature in our system is, the one which marks the boundary between State 


12 


and federal power. And yet this bill loses sight, entirely, of that great dis¬ 
tinctive feature, and calls upon the States to be accessory to their own do' 
gradation. If you have the power to cut up the States of this Union, in order 
to insure the election of members of the House of Representatives subservient 
to the views of those who control and direct the destinies of the country, 
come out like men and exercise it. This is a half-way measure, unworthy 
the boldness and the loftiness which once characterized the federal party. 1 
had hoped that the half-way house which so long furnished a place of refuge 
for chicken-hearted and designing politicians, with all its measures, had been 
broken up and abandoned forever. 

Taking the second section of this bill as an indication, it is about to be¬ 
come the head-quarters of the right wing of the Whig party. But the sena¬ 
tor from Kentucky says that this is a sort of organic law, prescribing the rule 
of action to the State legislatures, in relation to the election of members of 
Congress. What does the senator mean by an organic law ? Does he mean 
that Congress can, by an act of ordinary legislation, enlarge the powers of 
any department of the Government? We are told that it is to become a 
part of the constitution. And, sir, are you about to amend the constitution 
by act of Congress ? This has been the practice of the federal party from 
the origin of the Government. Whenever the powers conferred by the 
constitution have been found inadequate to effect the objects of their ambition, 
the principles of latitudinarian construction have been let in, and the deficit 
supplied by an act of Congress. It was so in the beginning, and, unless 
arrested, will continue to be so to the end. But, sir, pass the second section 
of this bill, and do you believe that States, which in their infancy performed 
prodigies by their constancy and their courage, will, in the maturity of their 
manhood, consent to become the pliant instruments to do the bidding of 
Congress, and to become the authors of their own degradation ? Do you 
believe that North Carolina, your own State, and one of the old thirteen, can 
be so unmindful of the glory of her past history as to prostrate herself in 
dust and ashes at the shrine of federal power ? Sir, I mention North Caro¬ 
lina to honor her. She has contributed largely to the wealth, the intelligence, 
respectability, and virtue of Alabama. Her sons have filled, with distinction 
to themselves and usefulness to their country, many of the highest offices in 
that State. 1 have in my eye [looking to his colleague] a proud and living 
instance of long-continued public service, and patriotic devotion to sound re¬ 
publican principles, on the part of a native of North Carolina, which delicacy 
to him prevents me from noticing as it deserves. Can you, sir, so far forget 
what is due to the legislature of North Carolina, as to call upon them, by 
voting for the second section of this bill, to become the subordinates of fede¬ 
ral power, and the instruments of their own disgrace? Whatever may be 
the course of other States, I will answer for Alabama. She has drank too 
deeply of the principles of liberty, and is too proudly conscious of her rights, 
ever to become the mere creature of this Government. She will stand upon 
her rights, and disregard it. Your second section, and it is of ominous import, 
will be to her as a school-boy’s tale. 

We are reminded, however, that these views savor of nullification ; and 
senators on the other side, with grave fiices and in jilaintive strains, deplore 
the consequences of opposition to this measure. Undistinguished as my 
public life lias been, it is known that J never was a nullifier; much less am I 


13 


the advocate of tliose latitudiiious doctrines by vvlilcli tlie constitution has 
been brought to its last gasp. But in regard to this measure there is no ne¬ 
cessity for nullification. The law will be inoperative in itself. It will stand 
a perfect dead letter on the statute book, unless the sovereign States of this 
Union, with a tameness and submission of which they have furnished no pre¬ 
vious example, should quietly consent to become the mere minions of federal 
power. 

The senator from Kentucky expostulated in rather severe terms with the 
senator from New York, (Mr. Wright,) upon what the former gentleman 
considered a menace. I was struck upon that as upon all occasions, at the 
dignity and moderation with which the senator from New York expressed 
himself in regard to the fearful encroachments on the rights of the States. 
The senator from New York, in the loftiness of his patriotism, having 
anxious regard to the harmony of the Union, expressed the hope that his 
State would acquiesce in this bill if it should pass ; but added, that he would 
not say she would. The senator from South Carolina, too, (Mr. Preston,) 
who prides himself on being a nullifier of the most straitest sect, was equally 
severe upon the distinguished senator from New Hampshire, (Mr. Wood¬ 
bury.) Considering that nullification stock is not much in demand, I thought ^ 
the senator from South Carolina (Mr. Preston) received the overtures of 
the senator from New Hampshire rather cavalierly, and could only account 
for it upon the reason that the senator from South Carolina, and those with 
whom he acts, are in favor of all manner of monopolies, and extended their 
monopolizing principles even to the exploded doctrines of nullification. 

The times we live in are prolific in extraordinary events. Man is a pro¬ 
gressive being, either for good or for evil. It is so in public as well as private 
affairs. We are never stationary. What, I ask you, is the condition of the 
country at the time when you are about to make this fearful encroachment 
on the rights of the States, by changing a system sanctioned by time and 
approved % intelligence. This, sir, is a tremendous question. “ Shadows, 
clouds, and darkness rest upon it.” There was a time when it was supposed 
that the late extra session of Congress, both in its acts and its incidents, 
would have stood out by itself, alone, unrelieved, and without a parallel in 
the history of American legislation. From present indications, this session is 
to furnish materials for a chapter equally memorable in our political history. 
More encroachments have been attempted upon the rights of the States, the 
liberties of the people, and the true principles of the constitution, and are 
now in rapid progress to a fatal consummation, than at any period since the 
origin of the Government. As I was providentially prevented from express¬ 
ing my opinions upon some of these measures while they were in progress, 

I shall be pardoned for glancing at them now. 

They have a common origin, and point to a common object—the augmen¬ 
tation and increase of the powers of the General Government at the expense 
of the rights of the States, and if not arrested, in the end, the destruction 
of the liberties of the people. Like the tracks to the lion’s den, they all 
lead in one direction. There is no escape, no departure, no return. We 
have witnessed the determination on the part of a majority in this body to 
keep the floodgates of fraud and corruption uplifted, by refusing to suspend 
for a limited time, the operation of the bankrupt law, until the people could 
discover the precipice upon which they stood, and the yawning gulph that 


14 


was opening to receive them. Tliat measure, altliougli it may, and no doubt 
will afford relief to many honest debtors, is stewed and steeped in iniquity. 
Fraud is its mother, and corru[)tion is its elder brother. It strikes, with the effi¬ 
cacy of the fatal scythe, at the foundations of morality. This is the only 
country under the sun in which debts are to be paid by schedule and affida¬ 
vit. Look to the bankrupt systems of other nations, and you will find no 
precedent for it. 

So much for the moral indications of the session. A word as to your 
finances. “ The revenue is the State,” said the celebrated British philosopher 
and statesman. Your treasury is as empty as space. Your Government is bank¬ 
rupt. You have instituted loans, by the terms of which your credit is to be 
hawked through the markets of this country, and of Europe, and disposed of, 
like the repairs of a country bridge, upon the best terms you can obtain. In 
this state of your finances, you have refused to repeal the land distribution 
bill, by the effect and operation of which a great standing source of perma¬ 
nent revenue has been dried up and exhausted. In order to get the benefit, 
for political effect, of this act of wretched prodigality, you exhibit yourself 
before the eyes of mankind, in the extraordinary spectacle of a Government, 
giving away with one hand, and begging with the other—distributing alms at 
one door, and with mendicant humility, begging them at the other. , 

So much for your financial wisdom. Not satisfied with all this, a bill is 
now in progress in this body, the avowed object of which is to deprive the 
State courts of criminal jurisdiction, in all cases in which it may be deemed 
necessary in order to complete the progress of federal domination over the 
people and the States of this Union. That measure slumbers for the present, 
but it slumbers under the protection of the gigantic arm of an ascertained 
majority in both Houses of Congress, who seem to be fatally bent on filling 
up the measure of federal authority, and who will, no doubt, carry it on to a 
final consummation. And, last in this portentous and appalling series, we 
have the measure now under consideration, which strikes directly at the 
extent of the right of suffrage, and aims a fatal blow at what your ancestors 
intended to be the great citadel of popular rights and representative freedom, 
and inflicts a fatal wound upon the constitution. 

Such, sir, is a mere glimpse at the condition of the country at the time 
when you are about to make the bold, untried, and uncalled-for experiment 
upon the forbearance of a deluded, but proud-spirited, intelligent, and patri¬ 
otic people. Look upon this picture, and pause upon the consequences of 
what you are about to do, and the evils, additional, you will, in all probability, 
bring upon the country, should the second section of the bill pass. Let it 
not be supposed that I dwell with pleasure on the gloomy picture which a 
knowledge of facts and an imperious sense of duty have enabled me to ex¬ 
hibit. Far, very far from it. To my country 1 am attached by every sen¬ 
timent that can operate upon the soul of man. My home, my children, my 
destiny, are all identified with that country; and if I could cover her naked¬ 
ness, renovate her strength, revive her credit, restore the prosperity of her 
people, it would afford me joy and satisfaction inexpressible. And if there 
is any one desire, connected with public affairs, dearer to my heart than 
another, it is that our free and happy institutions, in all their excellence and 
beauty, may be transmitted to the succeeding generation in the full fruition 
of their utility and strength, when you and I, and all of us, shall have re- 


15 


signed the stage of public action to those who will be entitled to occupy it 
when we are no more. But these great and desirable objects can only be 
attained by restoring and preserving the balance of the constitution, giving 
to the people, the true source of all power, the rights secured to them by 
that sacred instrument, and rolling back the rude tide of federal encroach¬ 
ment. 

In matters personal to myself, I am a stranger to the language of entreaty. 
But, in the name and in behalf of a common country—in the true spirit of 
the federal constitution—by the memory of the departed sages and heroes 
of the Revolution—in the name of the present and all future generations, 1 
entreat senators to pause and reflect upon the consequences of what they are 
about to do. In that fraternal spirit which should ever prevail here, I say to 
gentlemen on the other side, “ Come, thou, and go along with us, and we 
will do thee good.” Assist us in preserving the rights of the people and the 
States, and in resisting the rude tide of federal encroachment; by doing which 
you will ensure to yourselves the most precious of all recollections while you 
live, and men in after times, reposing in security and peace under that admi¬ 
rable system of government which you will thus have contributed to cherish, 
preserve, and perpetuate, will rise up and bless your memories. 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0 041 565 224 0 


. ■■ > 

f .iji 'i^f; l)|k^ •>’. . 

i. V,: I';; 


•vcb . -,'* , ■■:'•. ■ / H 














LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0 041 565 224 0 


tlx 


xf xtt II«taxi 
•Ltfoti'tittiii'tii- >('! 









• •••I.... 


• «iiiitt>«Ltittt*tt ixt 

)x******!""'■' 

. 


..•iitittxiiM jijj 

• Mi»i>xx«<xtxix!xMStSx'xxn[!';'||;{ 


xiXii|>ia(«|||> 


<JitMix;j; 

• tl'jjjjixjjjjljjjjjj*”; j‘;‘*’t»»M»jI.JxM*5 

">• •iix.atxxxixi. • •• tit..'x,J|J5{”*J*J‘|| 

.IS 

. 

•••ixiaxXtt. 


XMM.'xixxMJxJlIJJx'Jrtt 

iiiiixiiHiififllisTOiilf 

......lilil 


llllM«XtM>a'x(>!l<I!{[ 

'niiiiiiiiiiliiiiteif 

.•VfJ'lflMiW 



iiiiiiiiiiiisiili 

■ •axaaaitH|aaia}«IUt^»nni! 

."li 


• xa'aliMitfxxi 
• •raa«aaaax'a2S|t^. 

iiiiiiilHiiijSlf’' 

"'’**''iaiiMaiaan|M**«njg 




.xtaxatihrl) 

. 


.wtejft 

wJHi K 


iiiiiiiii H i S 

MMaxiaiijaanj RIt 




..taaMa.RKM4tituT9 

.Mxxx 


iiii 
iiii 

'Maxat^aiaaa 


. 

xataJaxta ** ta jx i ij jli a I aiji J *• •• jta | 

... I.!!"'M*a xiai«a 





,xt 

• p;:ii:i 5 r.:|i»:: 




aaiatafaxii4aailiii|a,,,a2;:^;;;‘;‘;t|<|txiitaj 

ilPiiiiiiiilHliiililiii'iiiiiiiijnn'i’iit 

















































































































